HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/28/2000 BAKERSFIELD
David Couch, Chair
Patricia J. DeMond
Jacquie Sullivan
Staff: Trudy Slater
SPECIAL MEETING NOTICE
LEGISLATIVE AND LITIGATION COMMITTEE
of the City Council - City of Bakersfield
Tuesday, .November 28, 2000
· 1:15 p.m.
City Manager's Conference Room
Second Floor- City Hall, Suite 201
1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA
AGENDA
1. ROLL CALL
2. ADOPT SEPTEMBER 21, 2000 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS
4. DEFERRED BUSINESS
A. REVlEWAND RECOMMENDATION REGARDING DRAFTINGAN ORDINANCE OR
RESOLUTION OUTLINING THE ANNEXATION.PROCESS WITH CONSIDERATION
OF SUGGESTIONS FROM THE ANNEXATION TASK FORCE; REVIEW OF DRAFT
GUIDE TO ANNEXATION PROCESS
5. COMMITTEE COMMENTS
6. ADJOURNMENT
° __ DRAFT
BAKERSFIELD
· Alan Tandy, City Manager David Couch, Chair
Staff: Trudy Slater .. Patricia J. DeMond
Jacquie Sullivan
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
LEGISLATIVE AND LITIGATION COMMITTEE
Regular-Meeting
Thursday, September 21, 2000
1:15 p.m.
City Manager's Conference Room
1. ROLL CALL
Called to order at 1:24 p.m.
Members present: Councilmember David Couch, Chair
Councilmember Patricia DeMond
Councilmember Jacquie Sullivan
2. ADOPT AUGUST 24, 2000 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
Adopted as submitted.
3. PRESENTATIONS
None.
3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS
None.
DRAFT
Agenda Summary Report
Legislative and Litigation Committee
September 21, 2000
Page 2
4. DEFERRED BUSINESS
A. REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION RELATING TO PERMITS FOR VENDORS
CONDUCTING SALES FROM PORTABLE CONCESSION STANDS IN CITY
PARKS
Recreation and Parks Director Stan Ford explained that staff was seeking a two-
prong approach to vending and concessions in City parks. One approach is to seek
out companies willing to provide vending machines in the .parks. Another approach
is to seek out companies with portable concession stands. Staff prefers to utilize
portable and self-contained concession stands due to a number of reasons, including
the disrepair of the City's permanent concession stands, the costs involved in
rehabilitating them, the constraints placed upon the City relative to the terminations
with existing contracts due to current condition of permanent stands, and health
regulations in providing other than a building shell for food concessionaires. Request
for proposals (RFPs) would show how much interest there is in the community to
provide the requested services. Changes in the existing ordinance would be required
if proposals were found to be viable.
Councilmember David Couch questioned whether a third approach, a third RFP,
would be appropriate for permanent concession stands, speaking specifically of the
Beach Park concession stand. Councilmember Jacquie Sullivan suggested an
assessment of the existing structure at Beach Park, to see how much it would cost
to rehabilitate it. Councilmember Pat DeMond commented that her focus was on
providing a service 365 days a year. It was agreed the provision of service was of '
primary importance.
City.Manager Alan Tandy suggested longer than one year arrangements might result
in better negotiated agreements. City Attorney Bart Thiltgen reiterated the City's
moratorium on concessions was in still in effect.
Committee members agreed that staff should move forward with the proposals to
ascertain the level of interest in the community.
B, REVlEWAND RECOMMENDATION RELATING TO PORTABLE CONCESSION
STAND MATTERS IN AREAS OTHER THAN CITY PARKS
The two issues discussed relative to portable concession stands in areas other than
City parks centered on zoning (C1 vs. C2) and oversight of a lot site by a primary
business over a secondary business. The City's current ordinance indicates C2
Agenda Summary Report DRAFT
Legislative and Litigation Committee
September 2~, 2000
Page 3
zoning which staff recommends retaining. Oversight by a primary business over a
secondary business resolves many unanticipated problems, such as impacts on
surrounding business/property owners and mini flea markets. Development Services
Director Jack Hardisty indicated outdoor sales are prohibited in C1 zones. City
Treasurer Bill Descary indicated a recent resident concern over the primary vs.
secondary business issue had been resolved by the primary business allowing the
secondary business to operate at the primary business's location.
Committee members agreed no further action was needed relative to this item.
5, ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 200 p.m.
Staff Attendees: City Manager Alan Tandy, Administrative Analyst Trudy Slater; City
Attorney Bart Thiltgen, Deputy City Attorney Ginny Gennaro;
Recreation and Parks Director Stan Ford; Development Services
Director Jack Hardisty; City Treasurer Bill Descary; Fire Chief Ron
Fraze
Other Attendees: None.
(L&L\L000921.MIN.wpd)
DRAFT
RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ESTABLISHING AN ANNEXATION POLICY
FOR INHABITED ANNEXATION AREAS
WHEREAS, the City desires to enhance its annexation policy to provide residents
and property owners as well as City of Bakersfield staff maximum opportunity to plan for
and coordinate the activities leading to inhabited area annexations by the City of
Bakersfield; and
WHEREAS, the Council approved Urban Development Committee Report 1-98 on
May 20, 1998, improving and expanding opportunities for resident input on the annexation
· process; and
WHEREAS, this resolution reflects the City's current annexation polic~) processes
relating to annexation policy incorporating criteria contained within Urban Development
Committee Report 1-98; and
WHEREAS, the Council as a whole, and Council members in committee, have
listened to individual concerns about the .legal process and pre-legal informational process
followed by the City of Bakersfield; and
WHEREAS, City staff members have met with concerned citizens individually,
attempted to answer their questions, and attended meetings of the County of Kern's
Citizens Advisory Committee on Annexations; and
WHEREAS, while the City strictly follows State annexation laws and will continue
to do so, there is a consensus that additional avenues for resident input would open
communications with residents affected by proposed inhabited area annexations; and
WHEREAS, the County of Kern has encouraged the City to consider the voluntary
actions proposed by its Citizens Advisory Committee on Annexations.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the City of Bakersfield
that it is hereby the policy of the Council of the City of Bakersfield that for annexations of
inhabited areas initiated by the City staff shall comply with the following requirements:
1) Provide for individual noticing of property owners of protest hearings.
2) Provide individual noticing to all addresses in the proposed annexation area.
3) When publishing legal newspaper notices relating to annexations, use display
format entitled "Notice of Public Hearing" on the legal page which will include the
words "proposed annexation" within the heading.
Page I of 3
D AFT
4) Develop and make available to the public at the City Clerk's Office an information
guide which will provide a general outline of the annexation process, including
· examples of 1-3 above and sample written protest forms. This guide supercedes
the development of a Borderline issue detailing how the annexation process works.
The guide will be annually reviewed by staff to determine the need for updating.
5) Place annexation information referenced-in the information guide on the City's web
page for access by the public, including upcoming meetings, important hearing
dates, and additional information such as hypothetical examples of a property within
a proposed annexation area which reflects possible changes in: a) costs or fees;
b) the affects on the property tax bill; and c) a listing of potential City revenues and
possible expenditures as a result of the proposed inhabited annexation. This uSe
of the web page supercedes the use of the annexation hotline.
6) Hold at least one City services faire in each potential annexation area.
7) Work with proposed annexation area residents to coordinate a greater number of
small neighborhood meetings in each area so that each resident has an opportunity
to attend a meeting.
8) Continue to provide for no further City-initiated "bundling" of proposed annexation
areas non-contiguous to each other.
.......... 000 ...........
Page 2 of 3
DRAFT
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the
City Council of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting thereof held on
by the following vote: -'
AYES: COUNCILMEMBER CARSON, DeMOND, MAGGARD, COUCH, ROWLES, SULLIVAN, SALVAGGIO
NOES: COUNCILMEMBER
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBER
ABSENT: COUNClLMEMBER
CITY CLERK and EX OFFICIO of the
· . Council of the City of Bakesfield
APPROVED
BOB PRICE
MAYORoftheCityofBakersfield
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:,,
BART J. THILTGEN
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE of the City of Bakersfield.
(P:~&L~ResolutionAnnexationPolicy-Draft)
(6-15-00)
Page 3 of 3
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
REPORT NO. 1-98
MAY 20, 1998
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: ANNEXATION PROCESS
The City Council referred the Annexation Program to the Urban Development
Committee on March 25, 1998. The Committee, at its April meeting, discussed
proposed changes and additions to the program. The Committee listened to input from
several residents on suggestions for changes to the annexation process.
There was a consensus among Committee members that the program be
improved and expanded to include more opportunities for resident input. The
Committee recommended the following changes:
1. Improve and expand the functions of the annexation hotline to include
options for getting information on upcoming meetings, important dates,
etc.
2. Provide for individual noticing of protest hearings rather than relying on
newspaper ads.
3. Experiment with conducting a resident forum prior to the filing of the
annexation to get input from residents and notice the forum.
4. Revise the numbering system used to track survey results.
5. Coordinate a greater number of small neighborhood meetings in each
area so that each resident has an opportunity to attend a meeting.
6. Hold at least one City services faire in each potential annexation area.
URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
REPORT NO. 1-98
PAGE -2-
MAY 20, 1998
7. Develop an issue of Borderline which details how the annexation .process
works.
8. Provide for no further "bundling" of non-contiguous areas.
The Committee unanimously approved these changes to the process and
recommends Council approval.
Respectfully submitted,
Cbu~cilmember Kevin McDermott, Chair
Vi ndy Rowles
Councilmeml~r~l~ricia M. Smith
DBT:jp
S:~Urb-Dev-Com Rpt 1-98
ATTACHMENT A
CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON ANNEXATIONS
RECOMMENDATIONS TO IMPROVE THE ANNEXA~ON PROCESS
To improve the annexation process involving inhabited properties without 100% land
owner consent, the following actions should be considered.
VOLUNTARY ACTIONS BY THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
1. Provide individual notification to each property owner of an intention to initiate an
annexation. Include the name of the annexation proceeding and information on how to
participate in the annexation process within the notification.
2. Publish one display advertisement in the newspaper with the heading "Legal Notice" to
announce a scheduled protest hearing.
3. Published notices should give 30 to 45 days advanced notice of hearings/meetings.
4. Adopt a standardized protest letter form.
5. Disclose the criteria for counting and/or disqualifying a protest letter for each annexation.
6. Put annexation information on the web page (City).
VOLUNTARY ACTIONS.BY THE COUNTY
.. 1. Notify all owners of property within the proposed annexation area upon notification of the
'. proposal by LAFCO.
t 2. Notify the Citizen's Advisory Committee on Annexations of a proposed annexation.
3. County staff knowledgeable in the annexation process should attend annexation
informational meetings held by the City.
I:\KLEIN\CmES\ ADVCOMM \IDEAAMD3
MEMORANDUM
September 15, 2000 '
TO: LEGISLATIVE & LITIGATION COMMITTEE
David Couch, Chair
Patricia DeMond
Jacquie Sullivan
FROM: BART J. THILTGEN, City Attorney F
SUBJECT: Responses to 'Citizen's Proposed Annexation Guide Changes
At the August 24, 2000 meeting of the Legislative & Litigation Committee, a group of
citizens presented the Committee with a list of seven (7) proposed changes to the AnnexatiOn
Guide. At the request of the Committee, the following provides written responses to the proposed
changes.
1) Include in Preface - third paragraph -"This document will be reviewed and Ul~da~6~'.',
by staff each March, but may be reviewed and updated as need during the
esponse. Th~s statement ~s a d~rect~on to staff, ratherthan an ~nformabonal item describing t~??:;!:?
annexation process and is more appropriately included in the resolution estabiiShi~'"~?
an annexation policy. The last sentence of paragraph four of the draft res°luti~,nli~.~?~
provides: "The guide will be annually reviewed by staff to determine the
updating." This language is preferable to the proposed language as it
restrict the timing of staff's review of the guide to the month of March but all°W~'~;~
review to occur at any time to effectuate necessary changes. :'
2) In the spirit of full disclosure and honesty, we would like the Guide to include
information on the impact AB1555 will have on annexations.
Response: Since AB1555 simply extends the sunshine date of existing law relating onlYt0'
annexation of small (75 acres or less) islands of unincorporated areas, and whiCh~,'*':
only exempts the state law requirement for an election when between 25% and 50%
written protest is received at LAFCo, inclusion of a description in the guide could
create more confusion. The guide is aimed at being a broad view of the process of
annexation, and the description of a very limited circumstance, which is primarily
determined by LAFCo, not the City, would' complicate the broad view concept. As
stated in the guide, "It is by no means intended to cover all the regulations regarding
annexations."
S:\COUNCIL~VlEMOS~,nnex Guide Reps to Leg&Lit.wpd
LEGISLATIVE & LITIGATI( COMMITTEE .,,.::.'~.'..'i, ~.~.~!
September 15, 2000 · ''':~'. .... .' '~'."
Page 2
·
· -,,,'.;
City needs to declare standards for counting annexation pr&tests - City
to retain discretion in counting standards for each annexation (see #5 on Citizens· ';'i.: ,';~ .
Advisory Committee on Annexations City Voluntary list). -,..-.
Response: It is strongly recommended that such elimination of council discretion be avOided· 'J ."~
First, it is a maxim of law that one council cannot lawfully "tie the hands"' 0f.a'=~:':*
subsequent council. Second, the discretion must be retained to alloW the c0~n~il
to determine which standard of counting protests more equitably reflects~the'
position of those being annexed. For example, if all the property owners owned
rental property in the area, and all wished to be annexed, while 40% of the tenant
residents filed wdtten protests, the council would then have the option to annex °r
call for an election based upon the council's determination of equity. To' remove th~
council's ability to make this determination (such as only counting registered.~'
living in the area) could cause an injustice. '
4) Add to page 6 after explanation of public observation of protest countingi'
Election Code Number.
Response:Section 15104 will be added to the sentence ending with "Califomiastate Eh
Code."· · ' ' .~...
5) Add to page 8 prOtest Hearing: "by filing a Written protesL".' AlsO, ',f[Ocal
should be change to read, "Conducting Authority.". .. ~: .....:,. :-.
Response: In reviewing the section of the guide entitled "Protesting Annexations
unable to identify where the proposed addition of"by filing'a'
~ .. be located. Therefore, no response can be made. The term',LoC~i'
replaced with "Conducting Authority." '".. ' '.' -': ''~'''''.'''.*?;'':~:'*
6) Add to pages 9 and 10: Legal Annexation Name and Numbe~t~ tjti''6~
and Published Notice. Also add to bottom of pages: "by first class ~ail.,,*'
· . ' . . .. - ,~ ~:~.-~..~'~_;~,~,:,.~-~.~ ·
·
Response: The annexabon number and name have already been added to the forms.
. ,. . . . .
sending of nobces by first class mad ~s already required by state law, and ~nclus~on~?7~-_:
of this language is unnecessary ' '-
· ~ · ~.',:...~:~i~-...
·. ' . . , ..::.:,...*.,~.~:~,~?~../..;~..,
7) Add to pages 11 .and 12, next to Annexation Name: Annexation Number.
· '"'.':i.i-~:'* ':' "
Response: This proposal has already been accomplished.
BJT:laa ~ "'
cc: Alan Tandy, City Manager
Pamela McCarthy, City Clerk "
Trudy Slater, Administrative Analyst
S:\COUNCILUVlEMOS~Annex Guide Rsps to Leg&Lit.wpd
'DRAFT
ORDINANCE
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF BAKERSFIELD ESTABLISHING AN ANNEXATION
POLICY FOR INHABITED ANNEXATION AREAS
WHEREAS, the City desires to enhance its annexation policy to provide
residents and property owners as well as City of Bakersfield staff maximum
opportunity to plan for and coordinate the activities leading to inhabited areas
annexations by the City of Bakersfield; and
REPLACE WITH:
WHEREAS, the City of Bakersfield desires to establish a fair and equitable
annexation policy to provide residents and property owners, as well as the City of
Bakersfield staff, legal and proper annexation policies that insure the knowledge
and input of all affected citizens of proposed inhabited area annexations by the
City of Bakersfield; and
ADD TO ORDINANCE:
WHEREAS, the City of Bakersfield acknowledges that County residents
have the right to freely choose to remain residents of unincorporated areas, the
City respects and honors all citizens their freedom of choice recognizing that
harmonious relationships within the total community is its most important
priority.
WHEREAS, the Council approved Urban Development Committee Report
1-98 on May 20, 1998, improving and expanding opportunities for resident input
on the annexation process; and
Page-'l.
REPLACE WITH:
WHEREAS, the Council approved Urban Development Committee
Report 1-98 on May 20, 1998 which addressed the annexation issue.
WHEREAS, this Ordinance reflects the City's current annexation policy
processes relating to annexation policy incorporating criteria contained within
Urban Development Committee Report 1-98; and
REPLACE WITH:
WHEREAS, this Ordinance reflects the City's current annexation policy
process relating to annexation policy incorporating criteria specifically listed as
Item No's. 2, 3, 6 and 8 as contained within the Urban Development Committee
Report 1-98; and
WHEREAS, the Council as a whole, and Council members in committee,
have listened to individual concerns about the legal process and pre-legal
informational process followed by the City of Bakersfield; and
WHEREAS, City staff members have met with concerned citizens
individually, attempted to answer their questions~ and attended meetings of the
County of Kern's Citizens Advisory Committee on Annexations; and
REPLACE WITH:
WHEREAS, City staff members have met with concerned citizens,
attempted to answer their questions and attended some meetings of the COunty of
Kern's Citizens Advisory Committee on Annexations; and
Page 2.
WHEREAS, while the City strictly follows State annexation laws and will
continue to do so, there is a consensus that additional avenues'for resident input
would open communications with residents affected by proposed inhabited area
annexations; and
REPLACE WITH:
WHEREAS, while the City maintains it strictly follows State annexation
laws and will continue to do so, there is a consensus that residents affected by
proposed inhabited area annexations must be given full and fair information in
order to make an informed decision and exercise their freedom of choice.
WHEREAS, the County of Kern has encouraged the City to CONSIDER
the voluntary actions proposed by its Citizens Advisory Committee on
Annexations.
Change the word consider to ADOPT
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the City of
Bakersfield that it is hereby the policy of the Council of the City of Bakersfield
that for annexations of inhabited areas initiated by the staff shall comply with the
following requirements:
REPLACE WITH:
· NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the City of
Bakersfield that it is hereby the policy of the Council of the City of Bakersfield
that for annexatiOns of inhabited areas, regardless of the population or size of the
proposed annexation, the City shall comply with the following requirements:
1. Provide for individual noticing of property owners of protest hearings.
Change to: The City will notice all individual property owners of their protest
hearing by first class mail, using the most recent County assessment roll.
Notices will be mailed no less than 20 days prior to the protest hearing date.
Page 3.
2. Provide individual noticing to all addresses in the proposed annexation
area.
Change to: The City will notice individually to all addresses in the proposed
annexation area by first class mail. Notices will be mailed no less than 20
days prior to the protest hearing date.
3. When publishing legal newspaper notices relating to a~. exations, use
display format entitled "Notice of Public Hearing" on the legal page
which will include the words "proposed annexation" within the ~heading.
Change to: The City will, when publishing legal newspaper notices relating to
annexations, use display format entitled "Notice of Public Hearing" on the
legal page which will include the words "Proposed Annexation" within the
heading and will include the legal annexation name and number.
Please see example of newspaper notice on Page m of the Guide to the
Annexation Process.
4. Develop and make available to the public at the City Clerk's Office
an information guide which will provide a general outline of the
annexation process, including examples of 1-3 above and sample written
protest forms. This guide supercedes the development of a Borderline
issue detailing how the annexation process works. The guide will be
annually reviewed by staff to determine the need for updating.
Change to: The City will develop and make available to the public at the City
Clerk's Office the Guide to the Annexation Process which will provide a
general outline of the annexation process, including examples of 1-3 above'
and sample written protest forms. This information, single copies, will be
provided FREE OF CHARGE to the public upon request, to be noted on the
cover sheet of said Guide.
This Guide will be reviewed and updated by the staff each March, but may
be reviewed and updated as needed during the year.
Question: Will the Borderline or a publication of a similar nature still exist?
Page 4.
5. Place annexation information referenced in the Information Guide on
the City's web page for access by the public, including upcoming
meetings, important hearing dates, and additional information ** suchas
hypothetical examples of a property within a proposed annexation area
which reflects possible changes in: (a) costs or fees; (b) the affects on
the property tax bill; and (c) a listing of potential City revenues and
possible expenditures as a result of the proposed inhabited annexation.**
This use of the web page supercedes the use of the annexation hotline.
Change to: The City will place annexation information referenced in the Guide
to the Annexation Process on the City's web page for access by the public,
including upcoming meetings, LAFCo heating and protest hearing dates,
City faires and additional important information.
The City will post its most current Guide to the Annexation Process on
KGOV for public information and shall include all public meetings
relating to a proposed annexation process, i.e., LAFCo.public hearing date,
protest hearing dates, City Services Faires, etc. Said notices to be posted
20 days prior to the hearings.
The City will submit to the Bakersfield Californian and local television
stations press releases containing the aforesaid information, including the
legal annexation name, boundary description and annexation number 20
days prior to any heating dates as described above.
** to ** in the City's No. 5 statement: These statements cause misgivings on
our part. We feel they may be construed as "Teubnerisms" and could
cause you problems. Only provable facts should be included.
6. Hold at least one City services faire in each potential annexation area.
Change to: The City will hold at least one, but no more than two, City Services
Faires in each potential annexation area prior to the LAFCo heating date,
which will NOT be construed as or replace public information meetings.
The City will notify the affected public 20 days before the Faire and will
invite the affected public, members of the Citizen's Advisory Committee on
Annexation, County Representatives; specifically the County Supervisor
Page 5.
representing the designated area of the proposed annexation, as well as the
City Council member who would be representing the proposed annexed
area. Records of those invited and those attending will be kept and made
available for public review.
7. Work with proposed annexation area residents to coordinate a greater
number of small neighborhood meetings in each area so that each
resident has an opportunity to attend a meeting.
OMIT NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS !
Change to: The City will hold at least One but no more than two informational
public meetings at a public meeting site located near the proposed
annexation area. Written invitations to each meeting will be mailed to each
address within the proposed annexation area 20 days prior to the meeting.
The City WILL NOT sponsor, encourage or participate in private
"neighborhood" meetings or gatherings which are not open to all residents
or property owners in the proposed annexation area.
8. Continue to provide for no further City-initiated "bundling" of proposed
annexation areas non-contiguous to each other.
Change to: The City will not "bundle" non-contiguous areas for purposes of
annexation and will use the following definition of "non-contiguous":
(to be added)
ADDITIONS TO THE ORDINANCE:
9. The City will make available to the public all property owner and
address lists used by the City of Bakersfield in the annexation and
notification process.
10. The City WILL NOT begin an annexation process without written
documentation of at least 5 % of the registered voters or property
owners approval in the proposed annexation area.
Page 6.
11. The City WILL NOT, upon a failed annexation attempt, begin a
new annexation proceeding in the same area, or any part thereof,
within a two (2) year period.
12. The City WILL NOT use any tracking system of any annexation
survey materials which might identify any individual respondents, their
geographic location or in any way compromise an individuals right to
confidentiality.'
13. The City WILL NEVER force annexation upon unwilling citizens.
Page 7.
CITY OF
BAKERSFIELD
CITIZENS
GUIDE
TO THE
ANNEXATION
PROCESS
Prepared by the
Office of the City Clerk
November 28, 2000
PREFACE
The City Clerk for the City of Bakersfield has prepared this brief summary of the process
required by the Cortese-Knox Local Government Reorganization Act of 1985 regarding
annexations. This is a general guide intended to assist citizens in their understanding of
the annexation process. It does not reflect all regulations regarding annexations. Citizens*
are encouraged to get the most up-to-date information available prior to beginning
any protest effort, with emphasis on pages 4 through 6 of this manual.
This document is provided as a broad, general overview of the 'proceedings 'related to
annexations initiated by the City of Bakersfield and may not be interpreted or construed to
be complete, conclusive, or as legal advice. Specific and complete requirements as well
as additional references to applicable State law may be obtained from LAFCo, 2700 "M"
St., Bakersfield, CA 93301. However, specific legal advice should be sought from an
attorney.
CONTACTS
The following addresses and telephone numbers are provided for your information:
City Council City Clerk
1501 Truxtun Avenue 1501 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301 Bakersfield, CA 93301
(661) 326-3767 (661) 326-3767
Fax (661) 323-3780 Fax (661) 323-3780
e-maih city_council @ ci.bakersfield.ca.us
City Manager City Attorney
1501Truxtun Avenue 1501 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301 Bakersfield, CA 93301
(661) 326-3751 (661) 326-3721
Fax (661) 324-1850 Fax (661)' 852-2020
Development Services Director
1715 Chester Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301
(661.) 326-3733
Fax (661) 325-0266
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Annexations at a Glance ........................... '. ......... Page 1
LAFCo Proceedings ......................................... Page 2
City Council Proceedings ..................................... Page 3
Protesting Annexations ................................... Pages 4 - 5
Effective Date of Annexation .................................. Page 5
Annexation Terminology .................................. Pages 6 - 7
Sample Mailed Hearing Notice ................................ Page 8
Sample Published Hearing Notice .............................. Page 9
Sample Written Protest by Property Owner ...................... Page 10
Sample Written Protest by Registered Voter ..................... Page 11
Annexation Flow Chart ...................................... Page 12
ANNEXATIONS AT A GLANCE
What is annexation and how does it affect residents of the County? With this guide, the
City of Bakersfield will answer these questions and provide a broad overview of the
annexation process. It is by no means intended to cover all the regulations regarding
annexations. However, we hope it will provide basic information to assist you in your
understanding of the annexation process.
Annexation is a jurisdictional change, from County to City, of inhabited or uninhabited
areas. This jurisdictional change, governed by the Cortese-Knox Local Government
Reorganization Act of 1985, can be found in the California Government Code commencing
with Sections 56000. The Act is administered and enforced by the Local Agency
Formation Commission (LAFCo). LAFCo has the authority to approve or deny all
annexation requests.
LAFCo of Kern County is composed of two members from City Councils (throughout the
County), two members of the Kern County Board of Supervisors, two members from
Special Districts, and one general public member (§56325 & 56332).
LAFCo regulates, through approval and denial, boundary changes proposed by other
public agencies or individuals. In reviewing proposals for boundary changes, LAFCo is
required to consider certain factors prior to approval. These factors include, but are not
limited to, conformity between city and county plans, current service levels and the need
for future services to the area, and the social, physical, and economic effects that boundary
changes present to the community (§56841). Additionally, LAFCo is charged with
deterring urban-sprawl and promoting orderly formation and development of local
government, based upon conditions and circumstances (§56301).
Individuals included in the proposed annexation area have the opportunity to express their
opinions at two (2) public hearings. The first hearing is held before LAFCo. The second
hearing is held before the City Council of the annexing City. Citizens may submit written
.materials and/or oral testimony to both of these entities. The public hearing conducted by
the City Council is considered a "protest hearing" where property owner(s) and registered
voters', within the area, may protest the proceeding.
Within this guide you will find sections on LAFCo Proceedings, City Council Proceedings,
Protesting Annexations, and Effective Date of Annexation. Also included is a Glossary of
Terms, a Sample Hearing Notice (used by the City) and a Sample Written Protest..
-1-
LAFCo PROCEEDINGS
Application Review:
The LAFCo Executive Officer reviews the application package and, within 30 days, of
receipt, determines if the petition/resolution meets all legal requirements, the project's
requirements under CEQA, evidence that a satisfactory exchange of property tax has taken
place within the time prescribed by law, and whether the application is complete (§56828).
Notice of Filing:
If all of the documents are in order, the LAFCo Executive Officer issues a Notice of Filing
and sets a date within 90 days for a public hearing by the Commission where the
annexation proposal will be considered (§56828).
Public Hearing:
The LAFCo Executive Officer shall give notice of any LAFCo hearing being held by the
commission by publishing a notice in accordance with Sections 56153 and 56154, and by
posting a notice in accordance with Sections 56158 and 56159. (§56834)
Determination of Commission:
The hearing shall be held by the Commission upon the date and at the time and place
specified. The hearing may be continued from time to time but not to exceed 70 days from
the date specified in the original notice (§56840). At the hearing the Commission
considers the recommendations of the LAFCo Executive Officer on a number of factors
and policies, such as current and future population and density, current and proposed land
uses and potential incompatibilities with adjacent properties, current and future needs for
public services and the adequacy of the cost of those services currently, conformity with
the Commission's policies and standards, and other provisions of law (§56841). The
Commission also receives oral and written comments from citizens and other public
agencies at the public hearing (§56840 (b)).
Adoption of Resolution Making Determinations:
The Commission must adopt a resolution making determinations either approving, denying,
or modifying the annexation proposal within 35 days from the public hearing (§56851). The
Commission may also include specific terms and conditions in the resolution (§56844).
Additionally, the Commission designates a "conducting authority," the City Council in the
case of a city annexation. The Commission may authorize proceedings to conclude
without any further notice, hearing, or election if there is 100% consent of the landowners.
''2-
CITY COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS
The annexation process officially begins when the City Council adopts a Resolution of
Application to annex certain territory. The application is filed with LAFCo, along with the
certified resolution for annexation. By statute, the resolution must include specific
language and must be accompanied by prescribed documentation, such as a statement
of the reason for the proposal, a map and legal description of the boundaries of the subject
territory, a description of how services will be provided to the area proposed for annexation,
and California Environmental Quality Act compliance documentation (§56652).
The City and the County will determine a property tax exchange on each proposed
annexation. LAFCo reviews the application documents and the City's resolutions affecting
the property tax exchange and, if all is in order, a Notice of Filing is issued.
A public hearing is then conducted by LAFCo. Citizens may provide written and oral '
testimony. Upon completion of the hearing, the Commission (LAFCo) adopts a "Resolution
Making Determinations" either approving, denying, or modifying the annexation proposal.
Upon receipt of LAFCds resolution approving or modifying the proposed annexation, the
City Council will schedule a public hearing, commonly known as the "protest hearing,"
within 35 days of the Commission's resolution date. The Clerk will give notice of the
hearing, pursuant to Section 56154, no more than 60 days nor less than 15 days in
advance of the hearing date (§57002). Notices are distributed by first class mail to each
affected agency, the LAFCo Executive Officer, and chief petitioners. Additionally, although
not required by State Law, the City will provide written notice to all property owners and
property addresses within the proposed annexation area. Citizens interested in information
regarding any annexation may request that a special notice be mailed to them. This
request must be made, in writing, to the City Clerk.
Additionally, the hearing notice is required to be published in a newspaper of. general
circulation. The notice will be published as soon as possible, but no later than 15 days
prior to the hearing in The Bakersfield Californian. Although not required by State Law, the
City will use a display ad format. In accordance with Government Code Section 6061, the
notice is required to be published a minimum of one time (§56153).
A notice is also required to be posted. The City will post the notice as soon as possible,
but no later than15 days prior to the hearing date specified in the notice. It is to remain
posted up to the time of the hearing (§56159). The notice is posted on the City's Official
Bulletin Board which is located on the west wall near the southwest entrance to City Hall
(§56158).
PROTESTING ANNEXATIONS
Citizens affected by an annexation have two opportunities to voice their concerns regarding
the proposed annexation. The first is the public hea'ring conducted by LAFCo. The
second, and most important, is the public hearing or "protest hearing" conducted by the
City. Under State law this is the ONLYopportunity for citizens affected by the proposed
annexation to file an official written protest. Written protests of the proposed annexation
must be filed with the City Clerk up to and including the hearing. Any person not filing a
written protest, will be deemed in support of the annexation. Any protest filed after the
conclusion of the hearing will not be counted in the annexation proceeding. For a protest
to be officially counted by the local agency the following procedure should be followed:
1. Protest letter or petition must be filed with the City Clerk of the City 'of
Bakersfield after publication of the hearing notice, but before the conclusion
of the hearing (§57051). Each protest letter must:
a. Be addressed to the City Clerk
b. State whether the protest is being made by a landowner o_r registered
voter
c. State the name and address of the owner of the land as it appears on
the property tax bill. If the landowner's address is different from the
affected property location, you must include that information
d. State the name and address of the registered voter as it appears on
the Affidavit of Voter Re~Tistration
e. Sign and date the protest letter. You may not sign and date before
the publication date of the "Notice of Public Hearing"
f. Be filed before the conclusion of the public hearing
See Sample Written Protests on Pages 11 & 12
2. Those eligible to protest an annexation must be a land owner of property in
the proposed annexation area o__r, any registered voter residing in the
proposed annexation area. An individual that is both a registered voter
residing! in the proposed area and a property owner may file a protest under
either, or both desiqnations. A person who owns multiple properties in the
affected area my file a written protest for each property owned. If a property
is owned by more than one person, each owner is eligible to file a protest
(§57051)..
3. Property owned by more than one person, either in joint tenancy or tenancy
in common may each file a protest letter. However, only the individual's
proportionate share in the value of the property will be considered in valuing
the protest (§57052 and 56710(b)). For example: John and Jane Smith,
Joint Tenants, each file a protest as property owners. Each is counted as
one-half (as half owners) for a total of one protest..
-4-
4. The name on each protest letter will be matched against the most recent
voter registration roll on file with the Kern County Election Official, and/or the
assessment (property tax) roll on file in the Clerk's Office, depending on the
nature of the protest. The names on the protest letter must match the name
on these rolls.
Upon completion of the protest hearing, the results are determined as follows:
· An election to decide annexation must be held if at least 25% but less than
50% of the registered voters in the territory file a written protest;
· An election to decide annexation must be held if at least 25% of the number
of property owners who also own at least25% of the assessed value of the
land file a written protest;
· If more than 50% of the registered voters in the proposed annexation area
file a written protest, the annexation proceeding is terminated;
· If less than 25% of the registered voters or if less than 25% of the property
owners who own less than 25% of the assessed value file a written protest,
the annexation will proceed.
Any citizen interested in observing the processing and counting of protests by the City
Clerk, may do so in accordance with the California State Elections Code §15104.
EFFECTIVE DATE OF ANNEXATION
The City Clerk will file with LAFCo a certified copy of the Resolution adopted by the City
Council. The LAFCo Executive Officer determines whether the City's Resolution meets all
the conditions imposed by the Commission and, if so, issues a Certificate of Completion.
The Certificate of Completion is forwarded to the City, recorded with the County Recorder,
and a statement of boundary change or creation is issued by the LAFCo Executive Officer.
The Certificate is then filed with the State Board of Equalization and the County Assessor.
The Secretary of State is also notified of this action. In addition, the property tax transfer
resolution or agreement, if any, is forwarded to the County Auditor to bring about the
property tax transfer (§§57200 - 57204).
Once the City receives the Certificate of Completion, the City assumes responsibility for
police and fire protection, building inspection, refuse collection, animal control, planning,
and other services.
-5-
ANNEXATION TERMINOLOGY
Annexation: A process whereby territory is incorporated into a City.
CEQA: California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code
§21000 et seq.).
Chief Petitioners: Persons designated on a petition or resolution for
organizational change, to a maximum of three.
Conducting Authority: The entity or agency responsible for conducting the protest
hearing for an organization change.
Detachment: A process whereby territory is removed from a City.
EIR: An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) that is required under
CEQA after an initial study reveals that significant
environmental impacts may occur due to a project.
Governing Body: The Board or Commission or a local agency, either elected by
the voters or appointed by a parent governing body.
Inhabited Territory: Territory wherein 12 or more registered voters reside.
LAFCo: The Local Agency Formation Commission, is the governing
body responsible for ensuring the laws related to
organizational changes are followed. It is also responsible for
making determinations regarding services, land use
compatibility, boundaries, and other such issues when
organizational changes are proposed.
Lead Agency: The agency responsible for preparing an environmental
document per CEQA.
Local Agency:. Any local governmental entity--city, county, special district,
agency--created by State law.
Negative Declaration: A jurisdictional boundary change is considered a "project"
under CEQA. If under CEQA regulations the project is
determined to have no significant impact on the environment,
a Negative Declaration is filed.
-6-
Protest Hearing: A hearing conducted by the Conducting Authority, in this case
the City Council, where citizens have their opportunity to
officially protest ann'exation to a city.
Reorganization: A change to the boundaries of a city, county, special district,
county service area or sphere of influence.
Responsible Agency: The agency responsible for reviewing and commenting on a
completed environmental document per CEQA.
-7-
SAMPLE OF MAILED HEARING NOTICE
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD REGARDING
PROPOSED ANNEXATION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN of a Protest Hearing before the Bakersfield City Council regarding
the proposed annexation of territory to the City of Bakersfield as assigned by the Local Agency
Formation Commission (LAFCo) known as City of Bakersfield ANNEXATION NO. 398,
GENERALLY KNOWN AS PANAMA #12. LAFCo has determined the territory to be annexed
is inhabited or uninhabited (choose one).
The hearing will be held before the City Council of the City of Bakersfield and will begin at 7:00
p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard on WEDNESDAY, JULY 19, 2000,
in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California, 93301. The
purpose of the hearing is to receive and consider protests against the proposed annexation into
the City of Bakersfield.
The area being considered is generally located north and south of Panama Lane, west of State
' Route 99 (Freeway 99). See the attached map (Exhibit A) that shows the affected territory.
These proceedings were initiated by the property owner or City (chooseoneI . The reason the
has proposed this annexation is
The specific terms and conditions of the proposed annexation are detailed in the Resolution
adopted by the Local Agency Formation Commission. The Resolution is on file at the City
Clerk's office.
WRI'i-I'EN PROTESTS against the proposed annexation may be filed by any owner of property
or registered voter in the territory, with the City Clerk at any time prior to the conclusion of the
hearing on the proposed annexation. If you challenge the action taken on this Proposal in
court, you may be limited to addressing only those issues raised at the public hearing, or in
written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk of the City of Bakersfield prior to the close
of the hearing.
Dated:
Pamela A. McCarthy, CMC
City Clerk and Ex Officio Clerk of the
Council of the City of Bakersfield
Note: Although not required by State Law the City will provide written notice to all property owners and property addresses within
the proposed annexation area.
-8-
SAMPLE OF PUBLISHED NOTICE
1/8 Page Display Advertisement - To be printed on the Legal page of newspaper.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD REGARDING
PROPOSED ANNEXATION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN of a Protest Hearing before the Bakersfield City Council regarding'
the proposed annexation of territory to the City of Bakersfield as assigned by the Local Agency
Formation Commission (LAFCo) known as City of Bakersfield ANNEXATION NO. 398,
GENERALLY KNOWN AS PANAMA #12. LAFCo has determined the territory to be annexed is
inhabited or or uninhabited (choose one).
The hearing will be held before the City Council of the City of Bakersfield and will begin at 7:00
p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard on WEDNESDAY, JULY 19, 2000, in the
Council Chambers, City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California, 93301. The purpose
of the hearing is to receive and consider protests against the proposed annexation into the City
of Bakersfield.
The area being considered is generally located north and south of Panama Lane, west of State
Route 99 (Freeway 99).
These proceedings were initiated by the property owner or City (choose one) . The
reason the has proposed this annexation is
The specific terms and conditions of the proposed annexation are detailed in the Resolution
adopted by the Local Agency Formation Commission. The Resolution is on file at the City Clerk's
office.
WRI'i-I'EN PROTESTS against the proposed annexation may be filed by any owner of property
or registered voter in the territory, with the City Clerk at any time prior to the conclusion of the
hearing on the proposed annexation. If you challenge the action taken on this proposal in court,
you may be limited to addressing only those issues raised at the public hearing,or in written
correspondence delivered to the City Clerk of the City of Bakersfield prior to the close of the
hearing.
Dated:
Pamela A. McCarthy, CMC
City Clerk and Ex Officio Clerk of the
Council of the City of Bakersfield
Note: A/though not required by State Law, the City will publish in Display Advertisement Format.
-9-
SAMPLE WRITTEN PROTEST
BY
PROPERTY OWNER
CITY CLERK
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
1501 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301
I (Name) the undersigned property
owner do hereby protest the proposed annexation of the territory known as (Insert
Name of Annexation) , being proposed by
the City of Bakersfield. I own property located at (Insert address or parcel number if no
address) The purpose of this letter is to express my
opposition of the above entitled annexation.
Date: ~
(Print - See page 5, l-e) Print Your Name
(As it appears on the property tax bill - See page 5, 1-c)
Signature
Note: This document is provided as a broad, general overview of the proceedings related to annexations initiated
by the City of Bakersfield and may not be interpreted or construed to be complete, conclusive, or as legal
advice. Specific and complete requirements as well as additional references to applicable State law may be
obtained from LAFCo, 2700 "M" St., Bakersfield, CA 93301. However, specific legal advice should be sought
from an attorney.
-10-
SAMPLE WRITTEN PROTEST
BY
REGISTERED VOTER
CITY CLERK
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
1501 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301
I (Name) the undersigned registered voter
do hereby protest the proposed annexation of the territory known as (Insert Name
of Annexation) , being proposed by the City of Bakersfield.
I am a registered voter in the area proposed for annexation and reside at the following
address (Insert address) The purpose of this letter is to
express my opposition to the above entitled annexation.'
Date:
(Print - See page 5, l-e) Print Your Name
(As it appears on voter registration - See page 5, l-d)
Signature
Note: This document is provided as a broad, general overview of the proceedings related to annexations initiated by
the City of Bakersfield and may not be interpreted or construed to be complete, conclusive, or as legal advice.
Specific and complete requirements as well as additional references to applicable State law may be obtained
from LAFCo, 2700 "M" St., Bakersfield, CA 93301. However, specific legal advice should be sought from an
attorney.
-11-
ANNEXATION FLOW CHART
CITY COUNCIL REFERS TO CITY
REQUEST FOR MANAGER'S OFFICE & CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE PLANNING COMMISSION
ANNEXATION -'~ ~ ANNEXATION REVIEW PREZONING
PLANNING DEPT. FOR STUDY --~
AND RECOMMENDATION (IF NECESSARY)
LAFCO REVIEWS STAFF PREPARES PLAN FOR
AND EVALUATES LAFCO SERVICES, ENVIRON INFO CITY COUNCIL
SHEET AND TRANSMITTAL ~ RESOLUTION OF APPLICATION
LETTER
CITY AGREEMENT IS LAFCO HEARING - LAFCO CITY CLERK
NEGOTIATED WITH CAO ON SETS PROTEST HEARING CITY COUNCIL
TAX SPLIT -~. ADOPTS RESOLUTION MAKING ~ (No later than 35 days ~ PROTEST HEARING
(60 day time limit) DETERMINATION after LAFCO decision) ('Fo occur not le~s than 15 no more than
BEC]INS I~UBLIC NOTICING 60 days after I,AFCO decision)
CITY ADOPTS RESOI.UTION LESS TI lAN
APPROVING ANNEXATION 25% PROTEST
(wilhin 60 days of I,AFCO decision) J~
~ ELECTION
4 ~ APPROVED
MORE THAN 25% BUT
LESS THAN 50% - ~
LAFCO ORDERS ELECTION FALLS ANNEXATION GOES TO
ANNEXATION & ISSUES ELECTION
CERTIFICATION OF
COMPLETION ~g
ANNEXATION FAILS $0% OR MORE
PROTEST